Because no-one is here to provide an answer to your question, we are here to participate in a forum and most of us do not enjoy these threads.

Also your question has been answered - in various ways by different people. I can answer it if I wish to, as I've seen many uses of shock collars, in real life and on videos; however I don't really wish to discuss it because it will all just go around and around... and around. I don't have either the time or the inclination. As said already, it's been done to death, and then some.

We are not naive, I doubt very much if you can tell us anything that we do not, between us, already know.

With a shock collar I would think it would be more important to be able to defend WHY you have to use one, not why you DON'T use one

[I have corrected your inability to quote properly]

Actually what Jackbox said was:

In response to which you said

Hence my response, which I will repeat.

There is no such thing as a "good shock" whoever administers it.

It is nothing but sheer and utter cruelty.

Malka I think you should step away from this thread! You have enough problems on your plate at the mo without getting all het up about this! Go on then!

Cruelty to dogs far outweighs any problems I might have, and I will not sit idly by while such cruelty is promoted.

Shane, instinct and judgement are critical when it comes to dog training, but IME many folks entire lack the first quality, and are short on the knowledge and experience to make good judgements; dog trainers would quickly be out of business if all owners had these qualities, no?

Dogs are not children. And I have given some explanation in bits and pieces (see post 55) of how I use the collar despite the fact that most posters aren't giving me much to work with here. Brierley's answer to my question was excellent and I will respond as soon as time allows.

No shock is a good shock....regardless of the expertise of the trainer.

I think I am done here, it's taking the same direction as usual....going round in circles....

The poster says she wishes to learn /understand a different prospective..I doubt that, as all we hear is the same old ....again and again.

As others have stated the dislike of the e-collar stems from the fact it inflicts pain. I have personally seen an e-collar used to stop a dog jumping up. The dog approached a person went to jump up the owner gave it a shock and surprise surprise the dog bit the person it was approaching.

From what I have gleaned from the thread your method involves training a command, affirming a command and then introducing the e-collar when it is felt the command is now understood. The dog is shocked when a command it is known to understand is not followed thus reminding the dog that when a command is given it must carry it out whatever it is doing.

The problem I have with this is, provided my assessment of the situation is correct although I could be wrong as for some reason you have avoided giving an example of how you use it in favour of repeatedly asking people questions you know aren't getting you anywhere, sorry I started to rant there.

Anyway the problem is no one is infallible, distractions happen and I do not personally feel a dog is capable of wilfully disobeying a command. If I call my dog and it doesn't come back I do not think "oh he is ignoring me" I think "what's caught his attention? What's more interesting than me?" The answer is normally fairly obvious be it another dog or some dead thing he can eat. I know these are difficult for him to ignore so I manage him around those things, I prempt his behaviour by putting him on lead before on seeing dogs in the distance (even though he is fine with them).

One of the main things that has been drummed in to me when training is 'Never set a dog up to fail.'

By the sounds of things you step in when a dog fails and give it a shock possibly reducing the chances of it happening again. I however would prefer my dog to fail or spend my life prompting behaviours than ever zap it with an electric collar.

ETA- Sometimes we ask too much of our dogs, 100% obedience would be great but it is not possible. Dogs are animals that thrive on their natural instincts. With the best will in the world we can get a dog to do what we ask most of the time but sometimes you have to choose your battles. I, for instance, know there is no point in trying to call Malcolm back from other dogs, he won't come back because I have yet to fully train a recall into him and all I do by calling him but not successfully getting him back is start the process of turning the command in to just another word. For that reason he stays on a long line. If I were to shock him when he didn't return, even once I felt I had got a recall on him, he would run and run and run. He has been abused in the past and if I were to use a schlock collar on him because I was too lazy to manage his behaviours then I am no less abusive than his previous owners.

On another note I once saw someone put on on the back of a persons neck (they were making a point as the victim in question was intending to use it on their dog). When the shock was given, on the lowest setting, the dog owners legs went out from underneath him and he landed in a heap on the floor. Funnily enough he didn't use it after that.

I apologise if I am wrong in my assumptions of your use of the e-collar. Perhaps I would have stood a better chance of seeing things from your perspective if you had answered one of the many questions posed to you instead of constantly repeating the same question back and disappearing when somebody finally answered it to your satisfaction.

Brierley, there's that "P" word again. I am not using the collar to stop a behavior, I am using it on the very rare occasions when I am absolutely certain the dog heard the command and fully understands the correct response to the previously taught command. I have already shown the dog how to be "right" (i.e., what the command words ask them to do), and that being right has some very pleasant consequences, and I start this as very young puppies. In other words, I am initially teaching them what they can do. At some point (and this timing depends upon the individual dog), I am going to show them that they must do what they have learned, regardless of the distraction level, and that failure to do so results in unpleasant consequences in the form of a correction of some sort; again, the "sort" is tailored to the individual dog. I am no longer teaching, I am now proofing learned responses. The dog has been given the key to control the training; he can choose to respond correctly and all is good, or he can choose to not respond correctly and all is not so good. In the case of extreme distraction (e.g., a live bird in the case of my high-drive retrievers), I would work up to that distraction level gradually, setting the dog up to be right at each level. I give the dog the opportunity to learn to control his reaction to the adrenalin surge that comes with excitement, and to learn that if he does as I ask, he will get the bird that much faster; I have seen some dogs do some amazing things once they understand that concept.

The collar comes into the picture only after conventional training, and is IME an invaluable tool when used properly. It is very rare that I would burn a dog, the nick button is there for a reason. That's all it is, a tool, in my opinion which has been formed over the past 37 years of (successfully) breeding, training and handling my dogs in three different disciplines, and 26 years in the private instructor business. I am constantly learning and refining my methods as I go. It took me 17 years of training and learning before I felt capable of using a collar.

I can't help but think some of the responders here are viewing the e-collar in terms of the way it was first used, when it indeed was an instrument of punishment and abuse. Some people still use them that way, by design or out of ignorance; I don't happen to be one of them, and never was. Things have changed since the dark ages. I am not trying to promote anything, I have actually advised many people against using the e-collar, and was responsible for convincing a big local retailer to discontinue their e-collar rental program. I have forfeited fees and walked out of clinics given by very well-known trainers, including Jim Dobbs (let me tell you, that was an eye-opener!), because their methods were clearly punishment-based.

I have seen self-proclaimed "reward-based/positive method" trainers who failed to practice what they preach, including one who inadvertently slammed a 4 month old rott's head into a metal gatepost when "teaching" the pup to heel. I have had owners bring me problem dogs which they trained with the local positive method trainers; the owners are angry (at the dog) and frustrated, and the dogs are a hot mess.

I signed onto this forum because you all seem to have the positive thing down. I hoped to gain some knowledge that shows how it should be done, and validates my feeling that what I have seen is positive training improperly done. I guess I am in the same camp as those of you who have seen/heard about poor e-collar training; the difference is, I can, and will if asked, recount the incidents I experienced, and I would never automatically assume that all of you are know-nothing idiot animal abusers, despite what I have seen with my own eyes.I can only infer, based on some of the responses to my posts, that many of the posters are unable/unwilling to extend that same courtesy to me. Their reasons remain obscure, as they do not seem willing to share their experiences with me.

Can you describe the process you witnessed, rather than just recounting your reaction to it?